4 ms·

You skipped Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was NT5, XP is NT5.1… same as how Vista is NT6, and '7' NT6.1. 8 and 8.1 are only considered 6.2 and 6.3... http://msd

You skipped Windows 2000. Windows 2000 was NT5, XP is NT5.1… same as how Vista is NT6, and '7' NT6.1. 8 and 8.1 are only considered 6.2 and 6.3... http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms724832(v=vs.85).aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms72...

x0054 13y ago
Windows 2000 and NT were "server" systems which sometimes were used on workstations.
- danieldk 13y ago
  Windows 2000 was certainly not only a server system. Windows 2000 was very popular outside the consumer segment. Like Windows XP organisations used it well beyond the intended lifetime. E.g. see this article from 2005: "Just as Microsoft prepares to end mainstream support for Windows 2000 next week, a report surfaces from AssetMetrix, an asset management software provider, that indicates Windows 2000 is still installed on nearly half of corporate desktops." Source: http://www.itjungle.com/two/two062205-story01.html http://www.itjungle.com/two/two062205-story01.html In other words, four years after the introduction of Windows XP, half of the corporate desktops was still using Windows 2000. The success of 2000 was only eclipsed by that of Windows XP.
  - x0054 13y ago
    Windows 2000 was a good stable system, but it was hard to find it on laptops, and it was targeted to the corporate world, not consumers. You could not go out to a store an buy a Windows 2000 desktop or a laptop. You had to order a business workstation or install it your self. I am not arguing that NT and 2000 should be dismissed, I was simply talking about consumer grade OS MS has been putting out.
    - pjmlp 13y ago
      > You could not go out to a store an buy a Windows 2000 desktop or a laptop. On my home country you could.
- code_duck 13y ago
  Windows 2000 was the true next step for Microsoft after 98, not Me, as they prepared to jettison the DOS line entirely. Me was simply an extension of 98 with a lot of improvements backported from 2000. While it may not have been marketed as such, 2000 was as suitable as any Windows for consumer purposes. It turned into XP after relatively minor cosmetic and usability improvements.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    No, it wasn't. 2000 was the successor to NT in the business line the same way that Me was to 98 in the consumer line. And, while it was more usable for consumer purposes than NT, because it was a different code base and not marketed as a consumer OS and much consumer software was written to quirks of the 95/98 line, it wasn't as consumer usable as XP was (which IIRC had more backwards compatibility features, but more importantly was the target against which new consumer software was written and tested once it was released.
    - code_duck 13y ago
      To me the important thing to note is that the DOS line died with Me about a year later, and 2000 turned into XP which people are still using as a mainstream OS. Anyway, my original point was that it should be on his list of Windows versions. I don't mean to throw a wrinkle in his narrative, but 2000 was the predecessor of XP and it was neither wonderful nor terrible.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  Windows NT was a business (as opposed to consumer) OS, and included both Server and Workstation versions. 2000 was the direct successor to NT and filled the same role.
  - code_duck 13y ago
    It was a special time in Windows history, though, since it marks when the server and consumer OS started using the same kernel. That's why I think 2000 belongs on the list but not NT4 or Server 2003.

x0054 13y ago

Windows 2000 and NT were "server" systems which sometimes were used on workstations.

danieldk 13y ago
Windows 2000 was certainly not only a server system. Windows 2000 was very popular outside the consumer segment. Like Windows XP organisations used it well beyond the intended lifetime. E.g. see this article from 2005: "Just as Microsoft prepares to end mainstream support for Windows 2000 next week, a report surfaces from AssetMetrix, an asset management software provider, that indicates Windows 2000 is still installed on nearly half of corporate desktops." Source: http://www.itjungle.com/two/two062205-story01.html http://www.itjungle.com/two/two062205-story01.html In other words, four years after the introduction of Windows XP, half of the corporate desktops was still using Windows 2000. The success of 2000 was only eclipsed by that of Windows XP.
- x0054 13y ago
  Windows 2000 was a good stable system, but it was hard to find it on laptops, and it was targeted to the corporate world, not consumers. You could not go out to a store an buy a Windows 2000 desktop or a laptop. You had to order a business workstation or install it your self. I am not arguing that NT and 2000 should be dismissed, I was simply talking about consumer grade OS MS has been putting out.
  - pjmlp 13y ago
    > You could not go out to a store an buy a Windows 2000 desktop or a laptop. On my home country you could.
code_duck 13y ago
Windows 2000 was the true next step for Microsoft after 98, not Me, as they prepared to jettison the DOS line entirely. Me was simply an extension of 98 with a lot of improvements backported from 2000. While it may not have been marketed as such, 2000 was as suitable as any Windows for consumer purposes. It turned into XP after relatively minor cosmetic and usability improvements.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  No, it wasn't. 2000 was the successor to NT in the business line the same way that Me was to 98 in the consumer line. And, while it was more usable for consumer purposes than NT, because it was a different code base and not marketed as a consumer OS and much consumer software was written to quirks of the 95/98 line, it wasn't as consumer usable as XP was (which IIRC had more backwards compatibility features, but more importantly was the target against which new consumer software was written and tested once it was released.
  - code_duck 13y ago
    To me the important thing to note is that the DOS line died with Me about a year later, and 2000 turned into XP which people are still using as a mainstream OS. Anyway, my original point was that it should be on his list of Windows versions. I don't mean to throw a wrinkle in his narrative, but 2000 was the predecessor of XP and it was neither wonderful nor terrible.
dragonwriter 13y ago
Windows NT was a business (as opposed to consumer) OS, and included both Server and Workstation versions. 2000 was the direct successor to NT and filled the same role.
- code_duck 13y ago
  It was a special time in Windows history, though, since it marks when the server and consumer OS started using the same kernel. That's why I think 2000 belongs on the list but not NT4 or Server 2003.